From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700 back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video than any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C tapes, which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the VHS-C tape,
the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

Okay on to primary question.

One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with it
on your Macs? Can it play full frame video on your Mac? I cant imagine the file sizes of such video, and in my case there is no way such video would
fit on my dinky 30GB hard drive, with only 6GB free on my ibook G4. I think
I would need to attach my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record over without a lowering of quality?


Thanks,


John

PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace it,
but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video quality. My JVC will floor my
Kodak anyday for video.

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

"Bible John" wrote ...

I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this
camera cost about $700 back in 2001. Its okay,
and certainly captures far superior video than any
Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But
anyways it uses VHS-C tapes, which can be easily
played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since
VHS tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I
want to give people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes.

Most people have DVD players now. You can get a
reasonably nice one for $50

But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the
VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This seems
to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will
VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

Yes, all tapes will wear out from repeated recording/
playing/erasing, etc. At least analog tapes will gradually
deteriorate so you can get some "advance notice" when
it gets too bad to continue to use. With digital, you may
never know when you have reached the limit until you
record something and then find it won't play back.

Okay on to primary question.

One day when I get the money I will buy myself a
digital camcorder that will use Mini DV, DVD,
or a hard drive.

Avoid DVD if you want to do any subsequent editing, etc.

Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what
are your experiences with it on your Macs? Can
it play full frame video on your Mac?

I don't have a Mac, but I can't imagine that it wouldn't
play back full frame. Even if they are half as good as
their fans claim they are.

I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

DV video is 13.7 GB per hour. MPEG video is a
fraction of that size, if you can live with the trade-
offs.

and in my case there is no way such video would
fit on my dinky 30GB hard drive, with only 6GB
free on my ibook G4. I think I would need to attach
my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

Even 80GB is a bit tight depending on what you want
to do. Fortunately, hard drives are very cheap. These
days you can't hardly even buy a drive as small as 80GB.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you
erase and the record over without a lowering of quality?

MiniDV tapes cost ~$5 each. if what you are shooting is
not worth $5/hour, you shouldn't subject your camera to
the wear and tear of even turning it on.

The mini-DVD cameras *may*(?) use re-writable
discs, but the MPEG compression is barely adequate
for casual distribution and doesn't hold up to any kind
of post-production (editing, titles, effects, etc.) very
well. Unless you have a considerably lower standard
of quality than most of us.

Hard drives, of course, can be re-written hundreds/
thousands of times with no downside.

Richard Crowley in rec.video.production
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the VHS-C tape,
the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

Any analog copy will lose quality. No way around this. Or do you mean
that reusing an old tape is resulting in a lower quality for a fresh
recording on old tape?

If the latter, then it depends on your camcorder's erase heads and
other issues such as track alignment. I'd suggest a bulk eraser to
"clean" the tapes. However, since the media are in physical contact
with the heads, you're also mechanically wearing out the tape every
time it goes through the machine.

One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

If you intend to use this for archival purposes, I would avoid DVD.
Rewritable optical media have an unproven shelf life.

Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with it
on your Macs? Can it play full frame video on your Mac? I cant imagine the

*shrug* I have a cheap, cheap RCA (actually rebadged JVC) MiniDV
camcorder with Firewire. I've had it for a few years, but don't use it
much. My Mac mini can play back its output fullscreen but DV video
takes a lot of disk space as you noticed. I've got a few important
videos (my honeymoon, some tests of a rocket motor, etc) archived on
tape.

I also just bought a $88 digital palmcorder (MPEG-4) from Target the
other day. It's also a "5MP" (really 3MP) digital still camera. The
quality of this device is really quite good, mostly limited by the poor
lens. It records directly on SD cards; a 256Mb card holds 80 min at low
quality or 20 min at high quality. It also has TV-out (RCA cable
included) so you can copy your recording directly to VHS tape if you
wish. Unfortunately it stores the files in .ASF format, which is not
very Mac-friendly if you were planning to view and edit files on the
computer. Apart from that, it's extremely light and convenient.

The specific camera I bought (Aiptek IS-DV) is visible at: <http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html/ref=br_1_7/601-5327497-5646540?%5Fencoding=UTF8&frombrowse=1&asin=B0006G332A>

but it's much more expensive online than in the store. I paid about
$120 including tax for the camera and a 256Mb Kodak SD card.

As a side note, the camera uses an NP-60 Li-Ion battery with a quoted
life of 90 minutes. This is apparently an industry standard size, I
bought a set of two replacements on eBay for about $8.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record over without a lowering of quality?

Yes to all of those, and also obviously to the flash memory cards I
mention above. However in the DVD case, there is an erase lifespan, I'm
not sure what it is.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message news:1243i9gebnjup64@corp.supernews.com...

"Bible John" wrote ...

I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700 >>back in 2001. Its okay,
and certainly captures far superior video than any Palm Pilot, cell phone >> or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C tapes, which can be easily
played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS tapes are fear cheaper
than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes.

Most people have DVD players now. You can get a
reasonably nice one for $50

As do I. I have 3 DVD players.

But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the VHS-C tape, the
quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in many, but not
all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

Yes, all tapes will wear out from repeated recording/
playing/erasing, etc. At least analog tapes will gradually
deteriorate so you can get some "advance notice" when
it gets too bad to continue to use. With digital, you may
never know when you have reached the limit until you
record something and then find it won't play back.

Okay on to primary question.

One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that
will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

Avoid DVD if you want to do any subsequent editing, etc.

This is what I hear. But this may change in time.

Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with
it on your Macs? Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

I don't have a Mac, but I can't imagine that it wouldn't
play back full frame. Even if they are half as good as
their fans claim they are.

I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

DV video is 13.7 GB per hour. MPEG video is a fraction of that size, if
you can live with the trade-
offs.

MPEG is light years ahead of the Windows Media format that my Palm Zire 72 uses. And even more light years ahead of crappy cell phone video.

But then again Zire 72 movies can be posted to the web, and MPEG videos
cannot without irritating many people (even those over broadband).

and in my case there is no way such video would fit on my dinky 30GB hard >> drive, with only 6GB free on my ibook G4. I think I would need to
attach my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

Even 80GB is a bit tight depending on what you want
to do. Fortunately, hard drives are very cheap. These
days you can't hardly even buy a drive as small as 80GB.

Too bad I bought it back in July of 2005.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you
erase and the record over without a lowering of quality?

MiniDV tapes cost ~$5 each. if what you are shooting is
not worth $5/hour, you shouldn't subject your camera to
the wear and tear of even turning it on.

The mini-DVD cameras *may*(?) use re-writable
discs, but the MPEG compression is barely adequate
for casual distribution and doesn't hold up to any kind
of post-production (editing, titles, effects, etc.) very
well. Unless you have a considerably lower standard
of quality than most of us.

My friend Brian does video editing, and for whatever reason he's attached to his old Amiga computer. He always has to convert the video with his capture card, but the videos do come out well.

Check out one video. This video was produced back in 2001.

http://johnw.freeshell.org/JWPaul.com/

I am happy with the quality of that analog camera I bought for $700 in 2001.

Hard drives, of course, can be re-written hundreds/
thousands of times with no downside.

Richard Crowley in rec.video.production

They made video cameras that write to a hard drive?

I heard there was a camcorder that wrote to a memory card, but I cant
imagine how one would capture 60 minutes of video on any memory card sold today.


John


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
<zwsdotcom@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1145162230.804866.211570@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Unfortunately it stores the files in .ASF format, which is not

very Mac-friendly if you were planning to view and edit files on the computer. Apart from that, it's extremely light and convenient.

My Zire 72 does the same. The video is crappy. I am able to play the video
on my Mac with VLC.

Why do you claim that .asf is good?

There are 2 .asf videos on this page. Check them out. You must have low standards, if you think such a camera, could replace a analog camera.

http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible/movies.htm

The specific camera I bought (Aiptek IS-DV) is visible at: <http://www.target.com/gp/detail.html/ref=br_1_7/601-5327497-5646540?%5Fencoding=UTF8&frombrowse=1&asin=B0006G332A>

but it's much more expensive online than in the store. I paid about
$120 including tax for the camera and a 256Mb Kodak SD card.

As a side note, the camera uses an NP-60 Li-Ion battery with a quoted
life of 90 minutes. This is apparently an industry standard size, I
bought a set of two replacements on eBay for about $8.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
over
without a lowering of quality?

Yes to all of those, and also obviously to the flash memory cards I
mention above. However in the DVD case, there is an erase lifespan, I'm
not sure what it is.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


Bible John wrote:

Why do you claim that .asf is good?

Er... where exactly do you see me claiming this? The only thing I said
about it was that it's hard to work with on a Mac.

ASF is a container file format, like AVI. It says nothing about the
quality of the contents - that's set by the codec and bit rate. In the
case of the VGA-resolution output from this particular camera, it
happens to be MPEG-4 at approximately 176kbps (plus about 40kbps for
the audio stream).

After recording out to VHS tape, I suspect you could not tell much
difference between a VGA-resolution MPEG-4 stream and a DV source,
depending on the subject matter of course. (I don't have any analog
equipment here, so I can't test this. I have, however, put the camera
on my TV and observed the quality there. As you'd expect, the low bit
rate leads to significantly worse artifacts in scenes with
high-frequency components, particularly low light scenes).

In my case, the convenience of immediate access and not needing to futz
about with huge files, Firewire transfers and transcoding, is worth
spending $100 for this camera. If I was making something that I wanted
to look more professional, I'd use MiniDV for editability and
distribute the finished product on DVD (or as MPEG-4 AVIs if this was
for online use).

I think pretty much by definition, any video that's going to be written
out to VHS tape on consumer equipment qualifies as "quick snap quality"
though.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

"Bible John" wrote

"Richard Crowley" wrote

Most people have DVD players now. You can get a
reasonably nice one for $50

As do I. I have 3 DVD players.

As do your customers. (Which was my point)

Avoid DVD if you want to do any subsequent editing, etc.

This is what I hear. But this may change in time.

The format that DVD video discs use is cast in concrete.
I can't see anything that could be identified as a change
in our lifetimes. It will take a whole new format (like
"Blu-Ray") to change the state of DVD MPEG
performance.

MPEG is light years ahead of the Windows Media
format that my Palm Zire 72 uses. And even more
light years ahead of crappy cell phone video.

Then you haven't seen MPEG that is compressed to
the same rate as your Zire gadget.

But then again Zire 72 movies can be posted to the
web, and MPEG videos cannot without irritating
many people (even those over broadband).

Note that there are a very wide limits of encoding
choices, bit-rates, etc. etc. for both MPEG and for
WMV (and for Quicktime/MOV/MP4, and for RV)
One must compare apples with apples for any kind
of valid differential evaluation.

They made video cameras that write to a hard drive?
I heard there was a camcorder that wrote to a memory
card, but I cant imagine how one would capture 60
minutes of video on any memory card sold today.

There is a pro HD format that will record 10-20 minutes
on a swolen memory "card" that likely cost more than your
whole camcorder. :-) Clearly made for short-form shooting
(news, film-style features, etc.) rather than for any kind of
long-form taping.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


"Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1243gm86l5v78cb@corp.supernews.com...

I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700
back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video than
any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C >tapes,

VHS is limited to around 250 lines of resolution. MiniDV tops out at 525 lines. Sorry, but a VHS camera doesn't begin to approach the video quality
of middle-of-the-line miniDV machine.

which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather
than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

Tape consists of particles attached by a binder to a plastic tape. Repeated use of a tape causes the particles to flake off. This causes drop outs. If you care about the quality of your video, you should avoid re-use of tapes.

Okay on to primary question.

One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that
will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with it on your Macs?

I don't have a Mac. I do have two digital camcorders.

Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

I'm not sure what you mean by "full frame." DV-25 (the standard used for miniDV) provides a frame that is 720 x 480 pixels (NTSC). If your Mac's screen has that much resolution (and it's hard to imagine any computer that doesn't at this point), then it will display the full frame.

I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

13.7 gigabytes per hour.

and in my case there is no way such video would fit on my dinky 30GB hard drive, with only 6GB free on my ibook G4. I think I would need to attach
my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

You definitely would.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
over without a lowering of quality?

DVDs are write-once devices (and a poor choice for digital video,
particularly if you want to edit). Hard drive - based camcorders can
rewrite data until the drive dies. However, they, too, are a poor choice if you care about quality and want to edit. MiniDV tapes can be recorded over, but the more they are used, the more likely you are to experience dropout.

Thanks,

John

PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace it, but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video quality. My JVC will floor my Kodak anyday for video.

Your JVC won't approach my VX2000, which is better-than-broadcast quality. Your JVC also won't approach my old TRV-20, which is just a middling miniDV machine. If, by "digital camera video quality," you mean the video put out
by still cameras, then, yes, just about any digital camcorder will do
better.

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message news:1243kaporgl8fd1@corp.supernews.com...

There is a pro HD format that will record 10-20 minutes
on a swolen memory "card" that likely cost more than your
whole camcorder. :-) Clearly made for short-form shooting
(news, film-style features, etc.) rather than for any kind of
long-form taping.

Yeah, kind of like that other crappy format with short loads.
What is they called it? I think they called it film :-)

BTW, Happy Easter

David


--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message news:wgn0g.2086$Lm5.1864@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...

"Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1243gm86l5v78cb@corp.supernews.com...

I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700 >>back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video than >>any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C >>tapes,

VHS is limited to around 250 lines of resolution. MiniDV tops out at 525 lines. Sorry, but a VHS camera doesn't begin to approach the video
quality of middle-of-the-line miniDV machine.

I know that. But since I am low on funds a VHS-C camera will do. I see
tapes being sold nearly everywhere, so obviously there are millions of
others who are using analog cameras.

A trip to any Walmart, Target, Kmart, or many other places will prove my
story true. Have you ever been in one of these stores and not been able to
buy tapes of all types? For audio, standard audio tapes are useful for me, since they can record radio, which cannot be "easily" done with a CD. But I await the day of a CD-R boombox. But then again the tapes are small, and I could care less about editing them. Its just when I want to duplicate them,
I find it hard fidning 2 tape boomboxes anymore. They used to sell 2 tape
and CD boomboxes, but know such decks are only available in the more
expensive stereo machines.

which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS tapes >> are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes rather
than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase over the
VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what happens in >> many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will it not?

Tape consists of particles attached by a binder to a plastic tape.
Repeated use of a tape causes the particles to flake off. This causes
drop outs. If you care about the quality of your video, you should avoid re-use of tapes.

Is it different with video than audio? With my Microcassette recorder, I
have taped over a tape dozens of times, and the audio still sounds clear.

Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

I'm not sure what you mean by "full frame." DV-25 (the standard used for miniDV) provides a frame that is 720 x 480 pixels (NTSC). If your Mac's screen has that much resolution (and it's hard to imagine any computer
that doesn't at this point), then it will display the full frame.

I bought my ibook in May of 2005.

I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

13.7 gigabytes per hour.

How about per minute? My Kodak Digital still camera cant even compare to my analog JVC camcorder. But anyways files are about 20 megs a minute with
that at 320x240 pixels.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
over without a lowering of quality?

DVDs are write-once devices (and a poor choice for digital video, particularly if you want to edit). Hard drive - based camcorders can rewrite data until the drive dies. However, they, too, are a poor choice
if you care about quality and want to edit. MiniDV tapes can be recorded over, but the more they are used, the more likely you are to experience dropout.

They used to make VHS camcorders, and I believe that newspeople still use them. Perhaps this was a better format than DVD. I used one of these camcorders once in 1999 to film a trip to New York. It worked okay, but the video was not as clear nor the audio as loud as the Sony 8mm camcorder I purchased in 2001 for $700.

Thanks,


John

PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace it, >> but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital camcorder.
I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital camcorders, is
camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video quality. My JVC will >> floor my Kodak anyday for video.

Your JVC won't approach my VX2000, which is better-than-broadcast quality. Your JVC also won't approach my old TRV-20, which is just a middling
miniDV machine. If, by "digital camera video quality," you mean the video put out by still cameras, then, yes, just about any digital camcorder will do better.

I know that. But my point was that my JVC camcorder produces MANY MANY MANY times superior video and audio than my Palm Zire 72, or any digital camera I have used. And this includes my old Vivitar, my current Kodak, my fathers Sony, the Mavica, and another Vivitar that I used.

Of all these cameras, no question my current Kodak is the best, since the videos are stored in the .mov format. But for whatever reason digital
cameras cant produce videos beyond 320x240.


John

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be ready
to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
<zwsdotcom@gmail.com> wrote in message news:1145163817.373924.53880@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...

Bible John wrote:

Why do you claim that .asf is good?

Er... where exactly do you see me claiming this? The only thing I said
about it was that it's hard to work with on a Mac.

Try VLC it works for me. How do these videos look on your machine? I'll bet they do not look much better than the videos the Zire 72 produces, whcih are great for web videos, but horrible for anything else.

http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible/movies/Golden%20Gate.asf

Go to my video page and download the Golden Gate bridge video.

ASF is a container file format, like AVI. It says nothing about the
quality of the contents - that's set by the codec and bit rate. In the
case of the VGA-resolution output from this particular camera, it
happens to be MPEG-4 at approximately 176kbps (plus about 40kbps for
the audio stream).

After recording out to VHS tape, I suspect you could not tell much
difference between a VGA-resolution MPEG-4 stream and a DV source,
depending on the subject matter of course. (I don't have any analog
equipment here, so I can't test this. I have, however, put the camera
on my TV and observed the quality there. As you'd expect, the low bit
rate leads to significantly worse artifacts in scenes with
high-frequency components, particularly low light scenes).

In my case, the convenience of immediate access and not needing to futz
about with huge files, Firewire transfers and transcoding, is worth
spending $100 for this camera. If I was making something that I wanted
to look more professional, I'd use MiniDV for editability and
distribute the finished product on DVD (or as MPEG-4 AVIs if this was
for online use).

I think pretty much by definition, any video that's going to be written
out to VHS tape on consumer equipment qualifies as "quick snap quality" though.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


"Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1244p70dmk4sc6f@corp.supernews.com...

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message news:wgn0g.2086$Lm5.1864@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...

"Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1243gm86l5v78cb@corp.supernews.com...

I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about
$700 back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior
video than any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways
it uses VHS-C tapes,

VHS is limited to around 250 lines of resolution. MiniDV tops out at
525 lines. Sorry, but a VHS camera doesn't begin to approach the
video quality of middle-of-the-line miniDV machine.

I know that. But since I am low on funds a VHS-C camera will do. I
see tapes being sold nearly everywhere, so obviously there are
millions of others who are using analog cameras.

A trip to any Walmart, Target, Kmart, or many other places will prove
my story true. Have you ever been in one of these stores and not been
able to buy tapes of all types? For audio, standard audio tapes are
useful for me, since they can record radio, which cannot be "easily"
done with a CD. But I await the day of a CD-R boombox. But then again
the tapes are small, and I could care less about editing them. Its
just when I want to duplicate them, I find it hard fidning 2 tape
boomboxes anymore. They used to sell 2 tape and CD boomboxes, but
know such decks are only available in the more expensive stereo
machines.

which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS
tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people
tapes rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and
then erase over the VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This
seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have
this effect, or will it not?

Tape consists of particles attached by a binder to a plastic tape.
Repeated use of a tape causes the particles to flake off. This
causes drop outs. If you care about the quality of your video, you
should avoid re-use of tapes.

Is it different with video than audio? With my Microcassette
recorder, I have taped over a tape dozens of times, and the audio
still sounds clear.

Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

I'm not sure what you mean by "full frame." DV-25 (the standard used
for miniDV) provides a frame that is 720 x 480 pixels (NTSC). If
your Mac's screen has that much resolution (and it's hard to imagine
any computer that doesn't at this point), then it will display the
full frame.

I bought my ibook in May of 2005.

I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

13.7 gigabytes per hour.

How about per minute? My Kodak Digital still camera cant even compare
to my analog JVC camcorder. But anyways files are about 20 megs a
minute with that at 320x240 pixels.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the
record over without a lowering of quality?

DVDs are write-once devices (and a poor choice for digital video,
particularly if you want to edit). Hard drive - based camcorders can
rewrite data until the drive dies. However, they, too, are a poor
choice if you care about quality and want to edit. MiniDV tapes can
be recorded over, but the more they are used, the more likely you are
to experience dropout.

They used to make VHS camcorders, and I believe that newspeople still
use them. Perhaps this was a better format than DVD. I used one of
these camcorders once in 1999 to film a trip to New York. It worked
okay, but the video was not as clear nor the audio as loud as the Sony
8mm camcorder I purchased in 2001 for $700.

Thanks,


John

PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to
replace it, but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller
digital camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller
digital camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital
camera video quality. My JVC will floor my Kodak anyday for video.

Your JVC won't approach my VX2000, which is better-than-broadcast
quality. Your JVC also won't approach my old TRV-20, which is just a
middling miniDV machine. If, by "digital camera video quality," you
mean the video put out by still cameras, then, yes, just about any
digital camcorder will do better.

I know that. But my point was that my JVC camcorder produces MANY
MANY MANY times superior video and audio than my Palm Zire 72, or any digital camera I have used. And this includes my old Vivitar, my
current Kodak, my fathers Sony, the Mavica, and another Vivitar that I
used.

Of all these cameras, no question my current Kodak is the best, since
the videos are stored in the .mov format. But for whatever reason
digital cameras cant produce videos beyond 320x240.

John

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always
be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the
hope that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 2006-04-16 00:11:54 -0400, "Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> said:

I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700
back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video
than any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C tapes, which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor.
Since VHS tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give
people tapes rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this,
and then erase over the VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This
seems to be what happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have
this effect, or will it not?

Okay on to primary question.

One day when I get the money I will buy myself a digital camcorder that
will use Mini DV, DVD, or a hard drive.

Does anyone have a digital camcorder and what are your experiences with
it on your Macs? Can it play full frame video on your Mac? I cant
imagine the file sizes of such video, and in my case there is no way
such video would fit on my dinky 30GB hard drive, with only 6GB free on
my ibook G4. I think I would need to attach my USB 2.x 80GB drive.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
over without a lowering of quality?

Thanks,

John

PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace
it, but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital
camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital
camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video
quality. My JVC will floor my Kodak anyday for video.

I have a sharp miniDV camcorder. It records 1 hour on a $5 tape or 2
hours in long play mode. It loads into iMovie by firewire and the video
is full screen. I edit it in iMovie and then when I am happy with the
result, I output it back to miniDV with no loss of quality, and store
the tape. Then I use iDVD and make a DVD which plays full screen with
full DVD quality on my computer or television using the ordinary
household DVD player. Forget analog video tape UNLESS your aim is to distribute it to friends who have only VHS. Then I do what I said and
copy the final miniDV that has come from the computer onto a VHS
directly and give it to the poor technologically stunted relative.
--
Michael | "He's dead, Jim."

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


"Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1244p70dmk4sc6f@corp.supernews.com...

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
"PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message news:wgn0g.2086$Lm5.1864@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...

"Bible John" <johnw_94020@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1243gm86l5v78cb@corp.supernews.com...

I have a nice analog JVC camcorder. I know this camera cost about $700 >>>back in 2001. Its okay, and certainly captures far superior video than >>>any Palm Pilot, cell phone or digital camera. But anyways it uses VHS-C >>>tapes,

VHS is limited to around 250 lines of resolution. MiniDV tops out at 525 >> lines. Sorry, but a VHS camera doesn't begin to approach the video
quality of middle-of-the-line miniDV machine.

I know that. But since I am low on funds a VHS-C camera will do. I see tapes being sold nearly everywhere, so obviously there are millions of others who are using analog cameras.

There are miniDV camcorders for less than $300 that will produce better
video than a VHS machine.

A trip to any Walmart, Target, Kmart, or many other places will prove my story true. Have you ever been in one of these stores and not been able to buy tapes of all types?

These stores are not exactly the benchmark for video.

For audio, standard audio tapes are useful for me, since they can record radio, which cannot be "easily" done with a CD.

A computer can do that. However, I use an MD recorder for audio.

But I await the day of a CD-R boombox. But then again the tapes are
small, and I could care less about editing them. Its just when I want to duplicate them, I find it hard fidning 2 tape boomboxes anymore. They
used to sell 2 tape and CD boomboxes, but know such decks are only
available in the more expensive stereo machines.

You're duplicating radio programming? Okay, I'll spare you the lecture
about copyright infringement. However, if you have a computer, you might
want to look at a computer-based solution. Among other things, it would be automated, so you wouldn't have to sit there and push "RECORD" all the time.

which can be easily played on my VCR with a VHS adaptor. Since VHS
tapes are fear cheaper than VHS-C, I think I want to give people tapes
rather than VHS-C tapes. But I am afraid, if I do this, and then erase
over the VHS-C tape, the quality will deteriate. This seems to be what >>> happens in many, but not all tapes. Will VHS-C have this effect, or will >>> it not?

Tape consists of particles attached by a binder to a plastic tape.
Repeated use of a tape causes the particles to flake off. This causes
drop outs. If you care about the quality of your video, you should avoid >> re-use of tapes.

Is it different with video than audio? With my Microcassette recorder, I have taped over a tape dozens of times, and the audio still sounds clear.

Yes, it's different. Audio is slow and the recording head moves linearlly. Video is fast and the recording head moves diagonally (technically, "helical scan"). Video tracks are much smaller and denser, i.e. there is far more information crammed into the same space. Because of this, drop out due to flaking is more of a problem on video than audio.

Can it play full frame video on your Mac?

I'm not sure what you mean by "full frame." DV-25 (the standard used for >> miniDV) provides a frame that is 720 x 480 pixels (NTSC). If your Mac's
screen has that much resolution (and it's hard to imagine any computer
that doesn't at this point), then it will display the full frame.

I bought my ibook in May of 2005.

Then it can play full frame.

I cant imagine the file sizes of such video,

13.7 gigabytes per hour.

How about per minute?

Well, I'm sure you can do the math.

My Kodak Digital still camera cant even compare to my analog JVC
camcorder.

If you mean at recording video, I'm sure that's the case. If you want to record video, you need a digital camcorder. If you want to take still pictures, you need a digital still camera. There is no single device out there than can do both well.

But anyways files are about 20 megs a minute with

that at 320x240 pixels.

With digital tapes, DVD's or hard drives, can you erase and the record
over without a lowering of quality?

DVDs are write-once devices (and a poor choice for digital video,
particularly if you want to edit). Hard drive - based camcorders can
rewrite data until the drive dies. However, they, too, are a poor choice >> if you care about quality and want to edit. MiniDV tapes can be recorded >> over, but the more they are used, the more likely you are to experience
dropout.

They used to make VHS camcorders, and I believe that newspeople still use them.

Absolutely and unequivocally not. ENG is done with DVCAM, miniDVCAM and, in some instances Betacam and Digibeta. And the BBC uses VX2000/2001, a miniDV machine, for ENG.

Perhaps this was a better format than DVD.

It was not. However, you're confusing apples and oranges. VHS is both a recording medium and a delivery medium. DVD is a delivery medium -- the camcorders that use it as a recording medium are low-quality toys.

I used one of these camcorders once in 1999 to film a trip to New York.
It worked okay, but the video was not as clear nor the audio as loud as
the Sony 8mm camcorder I purchased in 2001 for $700.

VHS and 8mm both have roughly the same resolution. Hi8, however, was
capable of 400 lines or so -- maybe that's what you had.

Thanks,


John

PS- My JVC will work for a while, and I am not in a hurry to replace
it, but perhaps one day it might be wise to get a smaller digital
camcorder. I sure do hope the quality of these smaller digital
camcorders, is camcorder quality, and not lame digital camera video
quality. My JVC will floor my Kodak anyday for video.

Your JVC won't approach my VX2000, which is better-than-broadcast
quality. Your JVC also won't approach my old TRV-20, which is just a
middling miniDV machine. If, by "digital camera video quality," you mean >> the video put out by still cameras, then, yes, just about any digital
camcorder will do better.

I know that. But my point was that my JVC camcorder produces MANY MANY
MANY times superior video and audio than my Palm Zire 72, or any digital camera I have used. And this includes my old Vivitar, my current Kodak,
my fathers Sony, the Mavica, and another Vivitar that I used.

Well, yes -- digital cameras take still pictures and camcorders take video. Though many still cameras can produce video, and many camcorders can take stills, the compromises necessary for their primary function preclude their producing GOOD quality results.

Of all these cameras, no question my current Kodak is the best, since the videos are stored in the .mov format. But for whatever reason digital cameras cant produce videos beyond 320x240.

I've heard of a few that go up to 640 x 480 at 30 fps, but the resulting
video is still far below even the cheapest miniDV camcorder in quality.

John

--
1 Pet 3:15-But sanctify the Lord God[a] in your hearts, and always be
ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope
that is in you, with meekness and fear
CERM-Church Education Resource Ministries
Founder and director
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

"Bible John" wrote ...

I know that. But since I am low on funds a VHS-C
camera will do. I see tapes being sold nearly everywhere,
so obviously there are millions of others who are using
analog cameras.

Yes, there are likely millions of others using analog cameras.
But you have to ask yourself, "for what?" For shooting home
movies of the kids playing in the wading pool in the back yard
and the trip to the Grand Canyon? Or for video production
where there will be several steps of post-production before
the release format?

Is it different with video than audio? With my
Microcassette recorder, I have taped over a tape
dozens of times, and the audio still sounds clear.

Video and audio tapes are basically the same kind of
thing, a thin magnetically sensitive coating on a plastic
substrate. Note, however that video is much more
demanding than audio. You can see defects more readily
than you can hear them, and most particularly, because
video uses very high-speed rotating heads to get the
bandwidth required for video recording. This makes the
expected lifetime of video tapes somewhat less than for
audio.

13.7 gigabytes per hour.

How about per minute?

13.7 GB/hour / 60 min/hour = 228.3 MB/min
Remember that this is the standard DV codec.

My Kodak Digital still camera cant even compare to my
analog JVC camcorder. But anyways files are about 20
megs a minute with that at 320x240 pixels.

You are comparing the novelty "video" from a still
camera to a real video camera. There are LOTS of
different codecs for video. You comparison is not
particularly meaningful.

They used to make VHS camcorders, and I believe
that newspeople still use them.

No, newspeople *never* used VHS, except maybe in
Hoople, North Dakota or somewhere in the back woods.
They started out with 16mm film, then went to 3/4"
U-Matic, then Betacam, and slowly converting to DV
as their Betacams die.

Perhaps this was a better format than DVD.

VHS and DVD are roughly equivalent. 8mm video
is slightly better. Any of the proper digital video
formats are very significantly better.

The novelty "video" produced by still cameras is
not even in the same category and is not comparable.

See Adam Wilt's "arrogant" rank scale for formats... http://www.adamwilt.com/DV-FAQ-tech.html

I know that. But my point was that my JVC camcorder
produces MANY MANY MANY times superior video
and audio than my Palm Zire 72,

Your Zire gadget produces HIGHLY COMPRESSED
video files. You are comparing apples and kelp.

Your Zire gadget would likely rank 1.5 or lower on
Adam Wilts scale of 1 to 10.

or any digital camera I have used. And this includes
my old Vivitar, my current Kodak, my fathers
Sony, the Mavica, and another Vivitar that I used.

You appear to be suffering from the confusion that
still cameras that produce novelty "video" are some-
how comparable to real video cameras. They are not.
The cheapest $150 mini-DV camera will run rings
around a $1500 still camera that makes "video".

Of all these cameras, no question my current Kodak
is the best, since the videos are stored in the .mov
format. But for whatever reason digital cameras
cant produce videos beyond 320x240.

Those are all still cameras. They produce "video"
only as a marketing novelty. Nobody shoots real
video on still cameras. They are FORCED to
compress the life out of the video because they have
such a limited amount of space to store the data.
--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

Oh, I've seen small market news departments that used to shoot and post
on s-vhs, and a few that went to digital-s, but they all dropped those
some years ago. A few wedding type guys still use digital-s, but not
many I know of. Most pros nowadays shoot some variant of DV25 or DV50,
like DVCAM or DVCPRO, unless they are still using their betaSP gear,
wich is long ago paid for and gives a good image... The folks on the
bleeding edge are trying to use HDV, but I think many of us pros are
still on the fence about that format and waiting for things to settle
some more.

Back to the original poster: A canopus ADVC-100 converter between your
existing JVC VHS camcorder or deck and your mac's firewire port will
let you play your VHS tapes into the mac, converted in real time to DV,
edited on the mac and played back out thru the same converter to VHS,
you can distribute VHS copies as good as the original generation VHS
was. Keep the Edited output and even the raw footage on DV tape for an
archive, and you will be able to use your limited hard drive space over
and over. For your needs, Bible John, this is the best of both worlds.

The thing you have to think about is, a converter like the ADVC-100
costs $300 new, and only does one function, conversions, and a new
low-end DV camcorder that can do that same on the fly conversion work
with analog inputs ALSO costs about $300. Maybe you can find an
ADVC-100 on Ebay for half that price, but they remain so popular, I
have yet to find one that cheap. If you buy the Dv camcorder for about
$300, you will have your choice of two camcorders to go out with, and
I'll wager the Dv one will have a better picture than the VHS one does.
Plus, you will be able to use it to bring VHS footage into your mac,
and output edited high-quality home movies back out of the mac, thru
the camcorder, and out of it's analog -output into a VHS recorder for distribution to your friends and family. That's a win-win-win. I'd
look at the Canon ZR series or maybe the Elura series Dv camcorders.
Make sure it has firewire, (almost 100% do now) plus analog in and out.
With this you will be set for a couple years at least. As others have
said, eschew the camcorders that record direct to a mini-DVD. These
will bring you nothing but sorrow and regret, especially if you want to
try and edit with them later. Plain low-end Dv tape camcorders are
perfect for your needs.

--- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113